TBO
Re: TBO
Would you add Jet Fuel to the fuel supply of an avgas engine? (Hint: it's prohibited because it can cause detonation and engine failure.) Why would anyone deliberately contaminate their avgas with it?
Jet fuel, kerosene, and Diesel fuel are all virtually the same product. None of them belong in avgas.
Neither does 2-cycle oil. It's not "approved" by the FAA ...OR the manufacturers. Not even the 2-stroke oil maker will approve that use of their product. What makes your "tech" think it's OK for use in airplanes? Will he put that advice in writing? Having added it to your airplane's fuel system, will he sign it off? Will he happily let the FAA know of his "discovery" of the use of that product?
What is the basis of approval he uses to recommend such a violation of the operating specifications of the equipment and the law?
RE: Avblend- The FAA will "approve" a lot of things if they don't directly affect the safety of flight in a negative way. FAA "approval" is not "endorsement".
Avblend contains phosphates that will leach copper out of your engines' bearings. If you don't have a Lycoming that requires it to remain airworthy, then do you really want it in your engine? I'd certainly not want it in MY engine!
Re: TBO
hmmmmmmm, A lot of discussion of additives derived from the original question of whether or not TBO is an "edict". I would like to diverse even further about the merits of purchasing a 172 with a contintal 6 as opposed to a later model with a lycoming 320 or 360. (purchase price being the factor vs. ongoing maintenance costs). Anyone care to jump in on this one?
Re: TBO
George Horn Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Would you add Jet Fuel to the fuel supply of an
> avgas engine? (Hint: it's prohibited because it
> can cause detonation and engine failure.) Why
> would anyone deliberately contaminate their avgas
> with it?
> Jet fuel, kerosene, and Diesel fuel are all
> virtually the same product. None of them belong
> in avgas.
> Neither does 2-cycle oil. It's not "approved" by
> the FAA ...OR the manufacturers. Not even the
> 2-stroke oil maker will approve that use of their
> product. What makes your "tech" think it's OK for
> use in airplanes? Will he put that advice in
> writing? Having added it to your airplane's fuel
> system, will he sign it off? Will he happily let
> the FAA know of his "discovery" of the use of that
> product?
> What is the basis of approval he uses to
> recommend such a violation of the operating
> specifications of the equipment and the law?
> RE: Avblend- The FAA will "approve" a lot of
> things if they don't directly affect the safety of
> flight in a negative way. FAA "approval" is not
> "endorsement".
Avblend never underwent formal engine testing to acheive "approval".
Approval means it will do no harm not it will do any good.
Aviation mineral oil is "approved", so what.
> Avblend contains phosphates that will leach copper
> out of your engines' bearings. If you don't have
> a Lycoming that requires it to remain airworthy,
> then do you really want it in your engine? I'd
> certainly not want it in MY engine!
Avblend is a low viscosity paraffinic basestock, same as aviation oils but thinner (used to be a mobil product). It acts as a slight solvent and evaporates in a few hours. It does not contain phoshates. Aeroshell 15W-50 and the W100 plus contain unstable phosphates that can leach copper and attack silicone seals.
Ed
Board Info
- Board Stats:
- Total Topics:
- 5964
- Total Polls:
- 1
- Total Posts:
- 16301
- Dormant:
- User Info:
- Total Users:
- 2065
- Newest User:
- TERRY MCFARLAND
- Members Online:
- 0
- Guests Online:
- 2303
- Most Active Users:
- Director, jplaxton00, helpdesk, reecedaniel, Cessna Tech, Larry Stanford, Rick Gardner, Bob H, wrbrent, mike11003
- Online:
- There are no members online
Forum Legend:
Topic
New
Locked
Sticky
Active
New/Active
New/Locked
New Sticky
Locked/Active
Active/Sticky
Sticky/Locked
Sticky/Active/Locked